CRM-M No.18369 of 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 225 CRM-M No.18369 of 2026 Date of decision: 20.07.2026 Krishana Kaur @ Krishna Rani ... Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. P.S. Sekhon, Senior Advocate with Mr. Guraziz Singh Dhillon, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab, for the respondent-State. ---- MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking regular bail in the FIR mentioned below:- FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 224 16.11.2025 Sardulgarh, District Mansa 15, 22, 27 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) MANJU 2026.07.20 18:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.18369 of 2026 -2- 2. As per the allegations, on 16.11.2025, the petitioner and co- accused Sajan Kumar were apprehended on the basis of suspicion, by a police party and recovery of 4 Kgs. and 200 grams of poppy husk and 1650 loose intoxicant tablets was effected from their conscious possession. The recovered contraband was taken into possession. The petitioner and co-accused were formally arrested. Investigation now stands concluded. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that she has been falsely implicated in this case on account of a dispute with one Raj Kumar Jindal who owned agricultural land adjoining to their land and had been eyeing upon the land of the petitioner thereby exerting pressure upon her family to sell the same. A civil suit was also filed by her husband in this regard. The said Raj Kumar Jindal is an influential person and on his behest that this FIR has been registered against her in connivance with police officials. The petitioner and her son were arrested by the police officials in the morning of 16.11.2025 but their arrest was wrongly shown to be made much later on. Even the gram panchayat had gone to the house of Raj Kumar Jindal on coming to know about the arrest of the petitioner which was stated to have been made on complaint of the said Raj Kumar Jindal. The petitioner is 61 year old person. A false recovery has been planted upon her. The trial will take considerable time to conclude as none out of 12 prosecution witnesses has been examined MANJU 2026.07.20 18:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.18369 of 2026 -3- so far. Her further incarceration will not serve any useful purpose. Her antecedents are clean. It is, therefore, argued that she deserves to be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel has argued that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. The pleas as taken by her are only a matter of evidence to be produced during trial and cannot be taken into consideration at this stage. The rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act are attracted in this case since commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. It is, therefore, argued that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. 5. This Court has considered the rival submissions. 6. The petitioner along with the co-accused is alleged to have been found in commercial quantity of contraband. She has placed on record some CCTV footage to buttress her argument that she was arrested in the morning of 16.11.2025. The video recording so placed by her does not show the same. The pleas as taken by her are to be decided on the basis of evidence to be produced during trial. Taking into consideration the gravity of the allegations as levelled against her and the circumstances peculiar to this case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. 7. It is, however, clarified that observations made hereinabove MANJU 2026.07.20 18:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh CRM-M No.18369 of 2026 -4- shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (MANISHA BATRA) 20.07.2026 JUDGE manju Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MANJU 2026.07.20 18:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order /judgment Chandigarh